A "United States" was only possible if men could agree to disagree about a great many things. What was expedient for them is, however, an essential of liberty. Theoretically, it might be desirable for all men to agree on everything, though I doubt it. Practically, such agreement would only be possible if all individual wills were crushed and subjected to a single will. The effort to do this is always in the direction of the well traveled road to despotism. The alternatives are agreement to disagree or despotism.
–Clarence B. Carson
HORNBERGER'S BLOG
January 11, 2022 The Reds Are Right About Assange
The Chinese communists are hoisting the U.S. government on its own petard, at least with respect to Julian Assange, the Australian citizen who, with WikiLeaks, disclosed war crimes committed by the U.S. national-security establishment. For decades stretching back to the Cold War, U.S. officials have reveled in leveling condemnations and criticisms of Red China for its human-rights abuses and denial of civil liberties.
Despotism Is the New Normal
by John W. Whitehead
Looking at the present, I see a more probable future: a new despotism creeping slowly across America. Faceless oligarchs sit at ...
Winning Freedom Requires Some Radical Solutions by Richard M. Ebeling
Suppose that there was a button in front of you that if you pushed, it would, in one instant, abolish all the governmental controls ...
Dear Conservatives: It's Time to Separate School and State by Scott McPherson
For decades, so-called “progressives” and other leftists have claimed that elected local school boards give parents control over education. Everyone knows it's a lie, ...
My Two-Bit Political Awakening
by James Bovard
Samuel Johnson may have been wrong when he declared, “There are few ways in which a man can be more innocently employed than in ...
Madness, Mayhem and Tyranny
by John W. Whitehead
Disgruntled mobs. Martial law. A populace under house arrest. A techno-corporate state wielding its power...
